• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

What to do with Sri Lanka?

Flem274*

123/5
They've gone completely off the rails. All their star batsmen bar one are in horrific form and the bowling stocks are dubious tstl.

Is there anyone in domestic cricket who can be called up? How do CWers see the way forward for Sri Lanka? I have no doubt they will be back, but I'm not sure they have the players in place right now to do it.
 

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
Make Mathews the captain. What's the point of appointing a 36 year old captain when the supposed reason for the last one stepping down was due to him being too old for the next World Cup?

Obviously it's more than just that, but you get the point.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
They're just not very good at the moment. I don't think there needs to be a national inquest though; they just lost a couple of bowlers who'd make their All-Time XI (one of which has a claim on the "best ever bowler" trophy) and they've had trouble replacing them at the same time as a couple of their batsmen have hit troughs. **** happens; there has to be someone at the bottom of the rung and it just so happens that they're in a lull at the moment. Some of the doomsday talk about how it's a massive problem for cricket and how they're going back to their minnow days is way over the top though.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
They're just not very good at the moment. I don't think there needs to be a national inquest though; they just lost a couple of bowlers who'd make their All-Time XI (one of which has a claim on the "best ever bowler" trophy) and they've had trouble replacing them at the same time as a couple of their batsmen have hit troughs. **** happens; there has to be someone at the bottom of the rung and it just so happens that they're in a lull at the moment. Some of the doomsday talk about how it's a massive problem for cricket and how they're going back to their minnow days is way over the top though.
This^

Their batsman will find form again and they have a few decent ones that will come through. Their bowling without Murali was always going to be poor, unless you were a firm believer in the Mendis hype.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Some of the doomsday talk about how it's a massive problem for cricket and how they're going back to their minnow days is way over the top though.
Yeah agree. NZ and England have had long periods of being ordinary. It happens.

SL suck, and they suck bad. But that's cricket.

People need to accept that the way cricket is run now, it will always be a deeply uncompetitive game. 4 good teams is something to actually be happy about.

It sucks but its true. It is an area where the sport is way behind other sports/leagues where there is plenty of competition.

Now is apparently the most competitive and even test cricket has been in ages and yet there are still only 4-5 teams who can beat each other consistently.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
They're just not very good at the moment. I don't think there needs to be a national inquest though; they just lost a couple of bowlers who'd make their All-Time XI (one of which has a claim on the "best ever bowler" trophy) and they've had trouble replacing them at the same time as a couple of their batsmen have hit troughs. **** happens; there has to be someone at the bottom of the rung and it just so happens that they're in a lull at the moment. Some of the doomsday talk about how it's a massive problem for cricket and how they're going back to their minnow days is way over the top though.
Agree. How's it bad for cricket? Prefer a resurgent WI to SL any old day.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
You don't agree with him actually. You said they're back to minnow status when Prince said they're not.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You don't agree with him actually. You said they're back to minnow status when Prince said they're not.
Zip it, ****.

"Oh we've found some spinnerzzzzzzz and one medium pacer who'll make us competitive again."

That's entertainment.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
I'm not saying you aren't entitled to have a bias towards fast bowling than spin bowling. That's fine. If you would prefer WI to be good over SL, that's also fine. Just saying your point and Prince's aren't the same at all.

Prince's point is what I agree with though. They're ****. But 4-5 teams are **** at once in test cricket. It's a flaw in the game. It's just SL's turn now.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Burgey clearly wasted IMO
Not yet.

Truly though, if you want to be number one for any decent period of time in test cricket you need good-to-great fast bowlers.

If you don't have them. you're pulling your pud. SL can get as many Vaas' and decent spinners as they like. If you aint got quicks in post-WW2 test cricket, you're a pretender to the throne.
 

NasserFan207

International Vice-Captain
Not yet.

Truly though, if you want to be number one for any decent period of time in test cricket you need good-to-great fast bowlers.

If you don't have them. you're pulling your pud. SL can get as many Vaas' and decent spinners as they like. If you aint got quicks in post-WW2 test cricket, you're a pretender to the throne.
Reckon SL would kill for a Vaas and a decent spinner right now TBH.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Reckon SL would kill for a Vaas and a decent spinner right now TBH.
Sure, as we'd kill for a decent set of middle order players, but the point is this:

Australia 46-53: Lindwall, Miller, Johnston

England 50s: Bedser, Trueman, Statham, Tyson

Aus early 60s: Davidson, McKenzie (with Benaud)

WI 60s: Hall, then Griffith too.

SA late 60s-60s: Pollock, Procter

England early 70s: Snow then Willis and a couple of solid blokes plus Underwood

Australia 70s: Lillee and Thomson, Walker, Gilmour

WI: well, a dozen of them

Aus 90s-00s: McGrath, McDermott, Hughes, Gillespie. Plus Warne obvs

India: the only time they had a really decent pacer since Dev: Zaheer, plus a bit of Sharma plus Lol-Sreesanth.

England: Glanderson, Tremlett, Broad, that Yorkshire buffoon who looks like he's just out of the pub (can't think of him), Finn.
 
Last edited:

NasserFan207

International Vice-Captain
Sure, as we'd kill for a decent set of middle order players, but the point is this:

Australia 46-53: Lindwall, Miller, Johnston

England 50s: Bedser, Trueman, Statham, Tyson

Aus early 60s: Davidson, McKenzie (with Benaud)

WI 60s: Hall, then Griffith too.

SA late 60s-60s: Pollock, Procter

England early 70s: Snow then Willis and a couple of solid blokes plus Underwood

Australia 70s: Lillee and Thomson, Walker, Gilmour

WI: well, a dozen of them

Aus 90s-00s: McGrath, McDermott, Hughes, Gillespie. Plus Warne obvs

India: the only time they had a really decent pacer since Dav: Zaheer, plus a bit of Sharma plus Lol-Sreesanth.

England: Glanderson, Tremlett, Broad, that Yorkshire buffoon who looks like he's just out of the pub (can't think of him), Finn.
I reckon a team with 3-4 world class spinners could do the same though, we've just never witnessed that side

awta for the most part tho

Herath is a decent spinner TBF
Would call him average to decent
 
Last edited:

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Herath is a decent spinner TBF.
Yeah, yeah he is. But you can have four decent/ very good spinners, a la India here in 77 when they had Chandra, Prasanna, Bedi and Venkat against a second string Australian side save for Thommo. But you will not dominate an era unless you have decent-very good quicks.

People on here can blow as many loads as they like over spinners, it's a fact.
 

Top